TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Chicago, Milwaukee, & St. Paul Railroad v. Ackley

Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Paul Railroad Company v. Ackley

Chicago, Milwaukee, & St. Paul R.R. v. Ackley, 94 U.S. 179 (1877)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
March 18, 1877
Docket
No. 352
Judges
Waite, Field, Stbong
Citations
94 U.S. 17924 L. Ed. 991876 U.S. LEXIS 1845
Headnotes
A railroad company in Wisconsin cannot recover for the transportation of property more than the maximum fixed by the act of that State of March 11,1874, by showing that the amount charged was no more than a reasonable compensation for the services rendered.
Summary
Ebbob to the Circuit Court of the County of Milwaukee, State of Wisconsin.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion — Waite

Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.

The only question presented by this record is whether a railroad company in Wisconsin can recover for the transportation of property more than the maximum fixed by the act of March 11, 1874, by showing that the amount charged was no more than a reasonable compensation for the services rendered.

What we have already said in Peik v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company, and Lawrence v. Same, supra, p. 164, is applicable to this case. As between the company and a freighter, there is a statutory limitation of the charge for transportation actually performed. If the company should refuse to carry at the prices fixed, and an attempt should be made to forfeit its charter on that account, other questions might arise, which it will be time enough to consider when they are presented. But for goods actually carried, the limit of the recovery is that prescribed by the statute.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Field and Mr. Justice Stbong dissented.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1886–1887: 11888–1889: 21890–1891: 21892–1893: 21906–1907: 31912–1913: 118862026peak 1906 · 3

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list